Nolan Finley Editorial On AWOL Politicians

[SteadySky]

With Nolan Finley, I find myself in a like/dislike relationship with his columns. When he is right, its 100% spot-on and when he is off, he is way off in his opinions. Hell, I'm a independent that dislikes both the Democratic and Republican parties, but does work within those too parties to decide who I vote for. Personally, I am totally fiscally conservative and rather "liberal" when it comes to issues concerning how to live your life, etc. I work in the environmental consulting profession and can best be described as a conservationist rather than a "tree hugger," etc.

I think he has it right concerning this matter of politicians not showing up to vote. The politicians from each party use every method under the sun to slow down, corrupt, modify, fix, destroy, etc., legislation that is working through the system. But at least it is IN THE SYSTEM. This to me seems like a bad, bad, road to go down trying to freeze or stop the system of governance tht we have in America. This happneded in Texas when a review of the voting districts were conducted in 2000 [[I think). Hell, those kind of political games go in both political parties and is as old as the republic.

I am curious as to what other Detroit Yes posters think on this issue. Is this such a monumental matter that we need to begin dismantling a bedrock aspect of our system? Thank you for your input. I am long time reader, but this is my first thread.

[Wesley Mouch]

Couldn't agree more with you. The WI Dems should stay, vote, and use their loss to get out their vote for the next election. If enough people agree, they can reinstate collective bargaining for benefits and pensions. And in the meantime, the unions can collectively bargain for wages. [[Isn't that enough? Get the money, and pay for your benefits and pension!)

[SteadySky]

Wesley Mouch,

I agree. This will be controversial and possibly a hugh campaign issue for those that oppose the policy. If they can win at the ballett box, then they can change the rules. Perhaps in the end a public policy woul fall into place that all sides can live with. Ah...... compromise. Remember when that used to be the order of the day?

[East Detroit]

Is this such a monumental matter that we need to begin dismantling a bedrock aspect of our system?

Yes. A corporate money backed war on the middle class is monumental enough.

Has Finley also spoken up when Republicans continually tried reading the dictionary in order to stop what they didn't want?

[English]

So much of our democracy is a farce, and was long before the Wisconsin 14 chose their act of civil disobedience.

[Augustiner]

I think he has it right concerning this matter of politicians not showing up to vote. The politicians from each party use every method under the sun to slow down, corrupt, modify, fix, destroy, etc., legislation that is working through the system. But at least it is IN THE SYSTEM. This to me seems like a bad, bad, road to go down trying to freeze or stop the system of governance tht we have in America. This happneded in Texas when a review of the voting districts were conducted in 2000 [[I think). Hell, those kind of political games go in both political parties and is as old as the republic.

I am curious as to what other Detroit Yes posters think on this issue. Is this such a monumental matter that we need to begin dismantling a bedrock aspect of our system? Thank you for your input. I am long time reader, but this is my first thread.

Oh, stop concern trolling. This is Political Strategy 101. If it was a bunch of conservatives jumping the state line, Nolan would be all over it. You don't win knock-down-drag-out political fights by shrugging your shoulders and saying "aw, well, better luck next time." That's a good way to demoralize your base so badly that you're lucky if they ever vote again. In an ideal world, sure, we'd have an orderly political process and we'd all behave like perfect gentlemen. But in an ideal world we wouldn't have to suffer fools like Scott Walker, either.

[Wesley Mouch]

Yes. A corporate money backed war on the middle class is monumental enough.

Inflammatory statements seldom contribute to constructive diaglogue.

Has Finley also spoken up when Republicans continually tried reading the dictionary in order to stop what they didn't want?

Maybe he should have, but that doesn't mean it was good behavior on the Reps part.

Mr. Walker has a philosophical opinion that public-sector unions with collective bargaining rights as they are today in Wisconsin are not best for Wisconsin. He's made statements of how he was unable to manage costs when he was in Milwaukee County. He was elected by a majority with this platform. He's putting his ideas into action. He's asking for an up or down vote.

Public unions there would remain able to bargain on wages, but not on pensions, benefits, and working conditions. They would be a civil service issues.

If voters there don't like the results, they can vote Mr. Walker and his kind out.

But my main point is that we should avoid turning opinions and actions on how to manage government into rhetoric such as 'war on the middle class'.

[jackie5275]

Public unions there would remain able to bargain on wages, but not on pensions, benefits, and working conditions. They would be a civil service issues.

If voters there don't like the results, they can vote Mr. Walker and his kind out.

But my main point is that we should avoid turning opinions and actions on how to manage government into rhetoric such as 'war on the middle class'.

My understanding is that the unions would NOT be able to bargain wages as they are now. The bargained wages would then be voted on by referendum by the entire state, which of course would go down in flames due to current general public sentiment of hate towards public employees if a wage increase was proposed.

These "opinions & actions on how to manage gov't" are turning into a war on the middle class. My gosh there are so many attacks happening & be planned on the working class in our nation, it's going to take us back to 1890. There are far more, better ways to fix budget deficits rather than cuttting out the workers collective bargaining rights. For people to say, "Making the workers sacrifice is the only way" either hasn't looked at the budget enough, doesn't know what they're doing, or is consciously deciding the workers will take the hit. By & large these days, it's the latter.

[Ray1936]

Not to threadjack, but Jay Leno noted, "Disorder in Africa and the Middle East has caused fuel costs to skyrocket. Disorder in Wisconsin has raised the price of cheese through the roof......"

[Wesley Mouch]

My understanding is that the unions would NOT be able to bargain wages as they are now. The bargained wages would then be voted on by referendum by the entire state, which of course would go down in flames due to current general public sentiment of hate towards public employees if a wage increase was proposed.

Appears you are somewhat right; vote required to exceed Consumer Price Index.

"Total wage increases could not exceed a cap based on the consumer price index [[CPI) unless approved by referendum".
Wisc. Governor's website

"He would allow bargaining on only wages, and he argues that, by banning negotiations on subjects like outsourcing, health coverage, workloads and seniority, his plan will be a boon for taxpayers at every level of government."
New York Times

[East Detroit]

Inflammatory statements seldom contribute to constructive diaglogue.

It is what it is. Not an inflammatory statement or attack in ad hominem style [[so, noone should get defensive), but simply my honest opinion of the brutal reality.

Maybe he should have, but that doesn't mean it was good behavior on the Reps part.

Not sure how what he did would or would not make it good behavior for Republicans. My point is that his message is weakened when he is so obviously partisan and picks and chooses his time for grandstanding outrage.

[Mikeg]

My understanding is that the unions would NOT be able to bargain wages as they are now. The bargained wages would then be voted on by referendum by the entire state, which of course would go down in flames due to current general public sentiment of hate towards public employees if a wage increase was proposed.

Your understanding is wrong. A quick Google search leads one to this State of Wisconsin web page about the "budget repair bill" which includes this explanation:

The state’s civil service system, among the strongest in the country, would remain in place. State and local employees could continue to bargain for base pay, they would not be able to bargain over other compensation measures. Local police, fire and state patrol would be exempted from the changes. Other reforms will include state and local governments not collecting union dues, annual certification will be required in a secret ballot, and any employee can opt out of paying union dues.

This change would still leave them with more collective bargaining rights than federal government workers have. The Federal Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 stipulated that mandatory collective bargaining for federal employees is limited to personnel employment practices only and that basic working conditions such as wages, hours of work, and employee benefits are instead subject to statutory provisions. [source]

That is why President Obama's recent budget proposal includes a two-year freeze on federal workers' pay that can be imposed by Congress without any buy-in from the unions. [source] Therefore, President Obama raised a lot of eyebrows when he entered the debate the other day and stated during an interview with a Milwaukee TV station,

"Some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin, where they're just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain generally, seems like more of an assault on unions."

Not surprisingly, a few days later his senior adviser Valerie Jarrett felt compelled to walk back Obama's comments during a rare TV interview:

“Let’s not turn what’s really a Wisconsin issue into a Washington issue”.

More than likely the federal employee union leaders reminded Ms. Jarret of her boss's 2007 campaign promise:

“If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I'm in the White House, I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I'll will walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States of America."

Imagine if they called him on it and the resulting spectacle of President Obama walking a picket line outside the White House and having to join the chanting federal employees:

"Hey Obama, what do you say, we want our pay increases and we want them today!"

[SteadySky]

Oh how amusing. Get called out for "concern trolling." I hardly even post.

Politicans seem to not care about the government they undermine and that government has been around long before people argued about collective bargaining. And that goes for both the right and the left and it looks like this is the case too. That really is the issue [[at least to me). The swing of public opinion just seems to be moving in the other direction at the moment. Whether it is right or wrong is not for me to say.

Hell, you could have a discussion about sending troops to fight a war [[and yes I know that Wisconsin would not be deciding that) and everybody will be present to give their opinion even if the end outcome is known in advance. But have an issue that affects perhaps the true power base of one of these parties and look what they do. Panic. They undermine the system at its very core.

To the bully trying to call a poster out for posing a question [[and God knows somebody would with a Nolan Finley editorial) if it so pisses you off complain to Mr. Lowell or other moderators to have me removed. You don't like the post try responding to the content rather than using intimidation.

[Augustiner]

Oh how amusing. Get called out for "concern trolling." I hardly even post.

I was being charitable. Either you're concern trolling or you have no clue about how the political process works. If the anti-Walker movement were to follow your tactical advice, which seems to consist of "roll over and die until the next election comes around," they would accomplish nothing and have no political support.

To the bully trying to call a poster out for posing a question [[and God knows somebody would with a Nolan Finley editorial) if it so pisses you off complain to Mr. Lowell or other moderators to have me removed. You don't like the post try responding to the content rather than using intimidation.

Quit playing martyr. Responding to your post is exactly what I did. If you don't like how I responded, why don't you report me to "Mr. Lowell?"

[SteadySky]

No martyr here. Try and stop with being charitable as it does not become you. The political process does not include running away and hiding in another state. They tried that crap in Texas and guess what happened, nothing. People lose political debate. Happens all the time. All this does is cause the "quote other side [[meaning Walker and his ilk)" to dig in and get even more difficult to deal with. Here is a little political lesson for you, right or wrong Walker is more likely to win now than ever and in the process fire a lot of people. Wonderful solution [[Not).

Allow me to avoid the false pretense of civility. Your an asshole and became one when you tried the whole bullshit trolling effort. I've learned if you let one of you types start that kind of crap it becomes the reality.

Hey, now that I used bad language maybe you can report me and get me banned. Ah, but wait - I will do that myself. Are you happy now? Does it make your day? Did you win something today? Oh, wait are you a union member [[good if you are - I have been one myself) and stood up for the membership?

Don't need to respond as I will never see it. Why don't you let the posters use the thread for what it was meant to be rather than just another chance for you to shit on someone.

[rjk]

My understanding is that the unions would NOT be able to bargain wages as they are now. The bargained wages would then be voted on by referendum by the entire state, which of course would go down in flames due to current general public sentiment of hate towards public employees if a wage increase was proposed.

These "opinions & actions on how to manage gov't" are turning into a war on the middle class. My gosh there are so many attacks happening & be planned on the working class in our nation, it's going to take us back to 1890. There are far more, better ways to fix budget deficits rather than cuttting out the workers collective bargaining rights. For people to say, "Making the workers sacrifice is the only way" either hasn't looked at the budget enough, doesn't know what they're doing, or is consciously deciding the workers will take the hit. By & large these days, it's the latter.

To steal someone else's line on this thread, quit playing martyr.

It's not a hatered of public employees. It's an understanding of the economic times we're facing.

[13074Glenfield]

The earthshaking proposals in the budget repair bills relate to union dues. Teachers would no longer be required to pay union dues and dues would not be automatically deducted from paychecks to be passed on to the unions. This would break the union dues to political contributions cycle that has been so helpful to both the unions and the Democratic politicians. This is the proposal that has the unions so concerned.

[old guy]

Do you think that if those 14 politicians hadn't left the state, we'd be talking about these issues right now? Right or wrong, it's brought attention to an issue that in the long run will most likely affect all working Americans. If nothing else, I applaud them for creating a dialogue that both sides should embrace.

[oldredfordette]

It's the murder of the middle class.

Glenfield, you'd be surprised to know that many union members care deeply about their union, not political parties, but the union that supports them.

[DetroitDad]

So much of our democracy is a farce, and was long before the Wisconsin 14 chose their act of civil disobedience.

I agree! I think the democratic politicians out in Wisconsin are both brave and inspirational.

[jackie5275]

To steal someone else's line on this thread, quit playing martyr.

It's not a hatered of public employees. It's an understanding of the economic times we're facing.

I'm NOTplaying martyr. It doesn't have anything to do with the current economic times. Most of the general population hates public employees no matter if the economy is good or bad. Most people have the same standard stereotype of public employees that they are fat, lazy, stupid, rude, & don't do any work, but rake in big bucks from taxpayer money which is why they're hated.

[13074Glenfield]

It's the murder of the middle class.

Glenfield, you'd be surprised to know that many union members care deeply about their union, not political parties, but the union that supports them.

No, that doesn't surprise me. All I said is that there's been a mutually beneficial arrangement between the unions and the Democratic party and this proposal threatens to interfere with the efficiency of that relationship. It won't break the relationship but it threatens the monetary aspect of it. No wonder they're hot.

[7miledog]

"We obey the laws, even the ones we disagree with. We respect the ballot box. And after even the most bitterly contested election, the loser accepts the results,..."

I can only hope ole' Nolan expresses the same indignation towards Congressional Republicans who are trying to defund health care reform. After all, the Dems won in '08 and passed the law fair and square. Those losers need to accept those results! Step up Nolan, and don't be a hypocrite.

[Wesley Mouch]

The earthshaking proposals in the budget repair bills relate to union dues. Teachers would no longer be required to pay union dues and dues would not be automatically deducted from paychecks to be passed on to the unions. This would break the union dues to political contributions cycle that has been so helpful to both the unions and the Democratic politicians. This is the proposal that has the unions so concerned.

Critical point.

And it would be the best thing for Unions. If they had to earn their keep from their members by 'agreement', not coercion, they'd become better at what they do. They'd be more responsive to their members, and not so much to the political class.

You're right. This is really the key issue here.

[Mikeg]

there's been a mutually beneficial arrangement between the unions and the Democratic party

Here's how AFSCME describes it: "We elect our bosses"